1 Austin 1962; Tambiah 1973; Ray 1973–1974.
2 See the discussion in Pilz 2011. Also Naiden 2013.
3 Depew 1997, 250; for the discussion of the function of speech in ritual, see Pilz 2011; and from a more general perspective, Podemann Sørensen 2014.
4 Pulleyn 1997, 2–3; for inscriptions, see Depew 1997.
5 Hitch 2011, 113–114.
6 These may have the indirect form with the name of the god in the form of the accusative (‘I invoke the god’, ‘I pray to the god’) or cletic addresses in the third person instead of the second as well as the self-referential meta-ritual hymnic openings announcing the intention to sing (‘Let me sing of’), appealing to other participants (‘Let us begin to sing’) or even asking about the correct speech of the hymn (‘How should I sing of…?’). For the tripartite structure, see Furley 2007, 122; Meyer 1933, 2; Pulleyn 1997, 15, 134. Also West 2007, 305–306, 316–317; and Metcalf 2015, 131–139.
7 See Depew 1997, 229–231; Pilz 2011, 154, 151: ‘In the absence of detailed descriptions of ritual practices in literary sources, it is therefore difficult to reconstruct whole ritual sequences, which would greatly facilitate their interpretation as performative acts.’
8 Throughout this book, I use the transliterated Greek term khoros, plural khoroi (χορός, χοροί) to refer to the dramatic tragic and comic choruses. Since I understand the khoros as a collective body of agents, I use it with mainly plural agreement.
9 Cf. Willi 2007, 14: ‘a hymn is designed—just like a sacrifice—to win or retain divine favour […], so as to create conditions under which a prayer is likely to be heeded. The encomastic or aesthetic element has therefore priority over the request.’ See also Naiden 2013, 33, 39, 327; Parker 2007, 181; Calame 2011b, 336.
10 Kowalzig 2004, 49–50; Hdt 5.67; Thuc. 3.104; Pl. Leg. 804a, 803e1–3.
11 Kowalzig 2007b, 80.
12 Kowalzig 2007b, 3–5, 68; also Calame 2009b.
13 The term appeared for the first time in Herington 1985.
14 See the discussion of various socially and culturally significant aspects of choral performances in Kowalzig 2007b; also in Swift 2010, 36.
15 Calame 1977.
16 Discussed already in Plato’s Laws; on the initiatory functions of khoroi: Calame 1977, 189–191; 361–363; Shapiro 2004; Winkler 1990; Rutherford 2004, 69; Nagy 1994/1995.
17 On deixis in Greek hymns in general, see Depew 2000; on deixis as essential aspect of Pindar’s hymns, see Bonifazi 2004; on hymns in the Indo-European perspective, see West 2007.
18 This problem was pointed out already by Wilamowitz-Moellendorff 1921, 242. See also the discussion of the case of the dithyramb in Swift 2010, 22–26, and in Ford 2013, 315–317. For a comparison between literary and cultic hymns in epic genres, see Devlin 1994.
19 The context is crucial. Devlin discusses hymns quoted in Athenaios which have all formal features of a cultic hymn but were performed at a party and therefore belonged to the genre of scolia, sympotic songs (Page, PMG 884–887 = Ath. 15.694c–d).
20 Swift 2010, 2, writes in the introduction to her study of the relationship between dramatic and nondramatic khoroi: “For the tragic chorus is still often regarded as an institution in its own right, and one which requires an explanation to make sense of it, whether this is as ‘the ideal spectator’, ‘the voice of the polis’, or ‘marginalized other’.”
21 In tragedy: Nagy 1994/1995, Nagy 2013, and Swift 2010; in comedy: Bierl 2009 and Calame 2004.
22 The above-mentioned problems are further complicated by general issues of relationship between parody, representation, and real-world practices in Old Comedy. To illustrate how perplexing the problem of a comic hymn can be, let us consider Agathon’s hymn in Thesm. 101–129. Scholars do not agree on whether the language of the hymn is exaggerated or normal: Kleinknecht 1937, 101– 103; Rau 1967, 104; Furley and Bremer 2001, I, 350–354; Horn 1970, 94–106. Agathon is described in the text of the play as composing lyrics (52–57, 67). Yet no piece of Agathon’s work is available for comparison, and it is hard to judge to what extent the hymn resembles Agathon’s tragic poetry or imitates something else, for example, his non-tragic poetic works, dithyrambs, or other lyric hymns. It has been interpreted also as a dramatic adaptation of a cultic hymn, see commentary in Austin and Olson 2004.
23 Kurke 2007, 64, on tragedy: ‘ […] we need to think about choral performance in its complex social and religious embedding as the substrate or background to tragedy, to be able to see what is the same and what is distinctive or different about tragedy’s appropriation of choral forms.’
24 See Carey 2013.
25 Devlin 1994, 107–134, comes to a similar conclusion. Since the literary analysis is her primary focus, she calls these shared components ‘hymnic topoi’ and analyses them across the corpus of Greek hymns, without applying the ritual/literary classification to the texts.
26 Kleinknecht 1937; Horn 1970; Furley and Bremer 2001. This approach presented already in Crusius 1894, 21.
27 To highlight this aspect of comedy, I use the spelling khoros and not the more traditional ‘chorus’. See for example Nagy 1994/1995, who uses the spelling khoros to include both song and dance as performance activities.
28 Henrichs 1995.
29 Henrichs 1996. On the tragic khoroi drawing on the circular dances in honour of Dionysos, see Csapo 2017.
30 Bierl 2009.
31 20 khoroi for the dithyrambic agon, 3 for tragedy, and 5 for comedy; see Wilson 2000, 22.
32 Revermann 2006a, 162–163.
33 Wilson 2000, 97–98.
34 Xen. Eq. mag. 3.2. It is not entirely clear, however, whether these khoroi are the same that perform later at the festival or some other khoroi specially trained for this particular purpose.
35 On choral imagery of choregic dedications, see Csapo 2010.
36 This assumption is shared by Fraenkel 1962, 191–215; Gelzer 1993, 207; Furley and Bremer 2001, I, 337–342; Horn 1970, 12–21, 58–59.
37 Fr. 590 = P. Oxy. 35.2737. The numbering of comic fragments follows Kassel-Austin, PCG, unless stated otherwise.
38 Sifakis 1971, 69; Fraenkel 1962, 194–195, 214; Zimmermann 1985, 209.
39 Devlin 1994, 133.
40 Detailed analysis of previous scholarship can be found in Bierl 2009, 310 n. 116. For one of the best and most recent summaries on the interpretations of the parabasis, see Imperio 2004, 3–104.
41 Bierl 2009, 310–312. The scene in Women at the Thesmophoria that Bierl chose as central for his analysis is quite exceptional in this respect, as is the play on the whole.
42 Sifakis 1971, 20, 59–70, 68–69. Nevertheless, while denying the original cultic relevance of the parabasis, Sifakis still thinks of the parabatic hymns as relics of Kultlyrik that go back to the early ritual stages of history of comedy, without giving any explanation of the function of these hymns in fifth-century drama.
43 The reflection on poetry is present not only in Aristophanes’ plays but also in parabases by Kratinos and Eupolis; see Kratin. Dionysalexandros, test. i, line 8 = P. Oxy. 4.663; also in Heath 1990 and Luppe 1988; although Storey 2003, 300–303, argues against the identification of Eup. fr. 392 as part of the parabasis.
44 See Imperio 2004.
45 Hubbard 1991, 17.
46 Wilson 2000, 102; Bierl 2009, 66.
47 Wilson 2000, 102 n. 243; cf. Pl. Symp.173a. References to this type of feast can also be found in plays as comic claims for the victory in advance: e.g. Pax 1017–1022.
48 Wilson 2000, 198–235.
49 On the value of victory and sense of competition expressed in this street, see Revermann 2006a, 114–116.
50 Imperio 2004, 22–23; Sifakis 1971, 69.
51 A similar idea about the parabatic ode has been presented in passing by Hubbard 1991, 21, without any further development: ‘The request for audience favor is thus paralleled and reinforced by a prayer for divine assistance to the chorus, serving to confirm the role of the chorus, and ultimately of the poet, as agents of public benefaction in the city’s cultic system.’
52 Throughout this book, I quote Aristophanes’ plays following the Greek text in Wilson 2007, with minor digressions. Translations are mine, unless stated otherwise.
53 Scholars have attempted to classify some of them as performed by the khoros in their fictional role and vice versa, but this approach does not seem to work.
54 Furley 2007, 123–124; see also West 2007, 305–306.
55 Metcalf 2015, 138–141.
56 See the discussion in Imperio 2004, 22–104, esp. 93–99.
57 Furley and Bremer 2001, II, 333.
58 West 2007, 324–325.
59 This deity is ridiculed as part of Euripides’ ‘teaching’, Nub. 265; cf. also in Eur. fr. 941.
60 Cf. Thesm. 987. Dover ad loc. interpreted the mixture of deities in the two parabatic hymns as the invitation of the triad of Zeus, Poseidon, and Athena to come to the festival.
61 Depew 2000, 74–75.
62 Swift 2010.
63 Swift 2010, 376.
64 See, for example, Kugelmeier 1996, 83–95, Willi 2007, 35–37; also Fraenkel 1962, Gelzer 1972.
65 Lines 775 and 797; analysis and discussion in detail in Kugelmeier 1996, 84–90; also in Horn 1970, 17–18 and Fraenkel 1962, 207–208.
66 Kugelmeier 1996, 90–91. Dover 1968, 175, translates the phrase as ‘let me also sing of’. The expression occurs in Terpander (fr. 697 PMG, cf. schol. Ar. Nu. 595) Hymn. Hom. Pan. 1, Eur. Tro. 511, Kratin. fr. 67.
67 Furley and Bremer 2001; also discussed in Fraenkel 1962, 194.
68 Cf. ποικίλος ὕμνος in Pind. Ol. 6.87 and Nem. 5.42.
69 With examples in Theogn. 15–18, Pind. Pyth. 1. 1–4, Aesch. Ag. 1470–1471. Soph. Ant. 781–786.
70 See especially Hubbard 1991, 32.
71 Fraenkel 1962.
72 Here and elsewhere, the Greek text of the fragments of comedy follows Kassel-Austin, PCG. Trojahn 2002, 63–65, excludes τοιόνδε from the lemma and prints it in the text as the first word of the commentary, following Calame on Alkman fr. 231, cited in Trojahn. However, Gelzer 1972, 148, gives reliable parallels for τοιόσδε in hymnic language.
73 Of the poems mentioned here, only the Homeric hymn to Apollo is extant. It has indeed a parallel phrase that opens the song, 21.1: Φοῖβε σὲ μὲν καὶ κύκνος ὑπὸ πτερύγων λίγ’ ἀείδει.
74 = Davies, PMGF S1; ἀρχή is a technical term for a hymn opening; see Race 1982, 5–8; but it probably means here the beginning of the book of poems. See Gelzer 1972, 141–144.
75 Cf. also Av. 769.
76 Gelzer 1972, 143.
77 These features are typical of Greek hymns in general: Depew 2000.
78 Dover 1993a, 239; Horn 1970, 121–138; Bierl 2009, 186–188.
79 In Frogs: the khoros describing themselves: ἐλθὲ… χορεύσων 326; ἁγνήν, ἱερὰν ὁσίοις μύσταις χορείαν 335–336; φιλοπαίγμονα τιμήν 334; ἔξαγ’ ἐπ’ ἀνθηρὸν ἔλειον δάπεδον χοροποιόν, μάκαρ, ἥβην. 351– 352; παίζων 375; παῖσαί τε καὶ χορεῦσαι 388; παίσαντα 392; τῆσδε τῆς χορείας 396; in the refrain ῎Ιακχε φιλοχορευτά 403, 408, 413; παίζειν τε καὶ χορεύειν 407; συμπαιστρία 411; and Dionysos’ final consent: παίζων χορεύειν βούλομαι 415.
In Women at the Thesmophoria: ποσὶν ἄγ’ εἰς κύκλον 954; ῥυθμὸν χορείας 956; βαῖνε καρπαλίμοιν ποδοῖν 957; κυκλοῦσαν χοροῦ κατάστασιν 958; χορομανεῖ 961; εὐκύκλου χορείας 968; πρόβαινε ποσί 969; τοῖς χοροῖσιν ἐμπαίζει 975; χαρέντα χορείας 981; χάριν χορείας 982; φιλοχόροισι 990; χοροῖς τερπόμενος 992; ἀναχορεύων 995; κύκλῳ 1000.
80 The khoros in Women at the Thesmophoria, therefore, refer not only to the cultic models but also ridicule Euripidean dancing and searching khoroi. See the discussion in Csapo 2017, esp. 133–135.
81 Eur. Hel. 1362–1363; Soph. OC 678–680, Ant. 152; Xen. Symp. 9, 4. In imagery: LIMC III Dionysos 151, 415, 472.
82 For personifications of Paidia, see Smith 2011, 64–66. The terms παίζω and παιδιά are difficult to translate as they include fun, laughter, enjoying oneself, and festivity. See Dover 1993b, 173–175.
83 References to the choral dance serve to emphasise the ritual activity of the khoros also in tragedy; see Davidson 1986 and Henrichs 1994/1995.
84 Henrichs 1994/1995, 90.
85 Kowalzig 2013, 4; Calame 2013, 340–345.
86 On the khoros of maidens contesting a rival group: Page 1951, 52–57, and Ferrari 2008, 109–118.
87 See Calame 2011a, 128–137.
88 See the discussion in Furley 2007, 118–119, 121.
89 Representations of prayers in comedy are more direct than in its tragic counterpart. For example, one of the most frequent formulas that mark rituals in comedy is the proclamation of euphemia: Ach. 237–238, 241, Pax 46, 434, 1316, Thesm. 39, Ran. 354, Nub. 263, Plut. 758; see Willi 2007. In comic plays, it is embedded in the dramatic action, whereas in tragedy we find mainly reports or descriptions of euphemia: Aesch. Ag. 28, 595; Eur. IT 1403, IA 1469, 1564, Soph. fr. 893 Radt. A detailed discussion of the symbolic of euphemia in tragic contexts can be found in Gödde 2011, 95–288. The concept of euphemia is often used in tragic contexts not as a ritual formula but as a description of the quality of the speech. Such use of the adjective εὔφημος is typical for tragedy in or out of ritual context Aesch. Ag. 636, 1247, Soph. Aj. 362, 591, OC 132, El. 630, Eur. Ion 98, Bacch. 70, Tro. 1072. A direct announcement of euphemia as part of the performed ritual in tragedy can be found in Aesch. Eum. 1035, 1039, and Cho. 386.
90 I follow the assignment of lines by Sommerstein 1985, 153.
91 On this verb in various sacrificial contexts, see Rudhardt 1958, 262, 272–281, 288, and Casabona 1966, 155–195.
92 Aesch. Eum. 187, Soph. El. 37, Eur. Andr. 399, El. 123, Ion 616; Aesch. Ag. 1656, Eur. Andr. 260, Phoen. 1149, Bacch. 1135.
93 Patton 2009, 28.
94 Patton 2009, 56.
95 Hdt. 7.192, Xen. An. 4.3.13. Cf. Sokrates’ pious intention to make a libation with the poison he is about to drink in Plato’s Phaido; see Patton 2009, 33.
96 Seaford 2017.
97 It was probably addressed to the stone pillar Agyieus, which was present on stage.
98 The ritual speech as paraphrase is discussed in Podemann Sørensen 2014.
99 Av. 864; Plat. Cra. 401b–d; ἀφ’ Ἑστίας ἄρξεσθαι became proverbial meaning ‘begin at the beginning’; Dunbar 1995, 510.
100 The curse is attested in oratorical prose Isoc. 4.157, Din. 2.16. Another typical formula of the opening of the Assembly to follow in 372: ἔδοξε τῇ βουλῇ.
101 Transl. Sommerstein 1985.
102 On how sacred speech makes the act a ritual, see Podemann Sørensen 2014.
103 On ritual as communication, see Rappaport 1999, 50–54.
104 Aeschin. 1.23, Din. 2.14, Thuc. 6.32 and inscriptions IG II2 112.6–12, IG II2 114.6–8.
105 See Zimmermann 1985, 228; Aubriot-Sévin 1992, 40 n. 23.
106 Furley and Bremer 2001, I, 352–353. Apparently, the dialogic model of the distribution of the ritual speech between participants is cross-cultural. It can be seen in the Indian and Hittite ritual traced by Watkins, 1995, 135–144, and in the people’s response in form of short formula Kyrie eleison to the priest’s prayers in early Christian liturgy; see Baldovin 1987 and a letter of Gregory the Great to bishop John of Syracuse in 598 CE, Ep. 9.12, as well as in the dialogism and dramaturgy in medieval liturgic lyric; see Kowalik 2010.
107 This almost looks like a ritual explanation of a ritual. For the explanatory function of ritual texts, see Podemann Sørensen 2014 and Assmann 1999.
108 Willi 2007, 25.
109 Corlu 1966, 117; Pulleyn 1997; Aubriot-Sévin 1992.
110 Chapot and Laurot 2001, 7.
111 See Kleinknecht 1937, 38, on the ritual practice of beginning and finishing prayers with εὔχομαι.
112 Eur. Heracl. 781–783.
113 Eur. Bacch. 689–690, 142, Dem. 18.260: Demosthenes claims that a cry εὐοῖ σαβοῖ was uttered by Aischines along with another cry ὑῆς ἄττης ἄττης ὑῆς and in military rituals one comes across a paian-cry addressed to the god Enyalios before a battle (Xen. An. 6.5.27, 5.2.14) and ἀλαλαγή (Schol. Pind. Ol. 7.68).
114 However, ὀλολυγή is not a shout but a noun derived from the cry; how the shout itself sounded is unknown. The formal distinction between them is that the paian-shout and ἀλαλαί are usually performed by men, while ὀλολυγή is associated with female ritual activities. See Rutherford 2001, 18–23; Pulleyn 1997, 178–184; and Porta 1999.
115 Porta 1999, 129. In later times, we are informed of acclamations that may include a whole sentence, for example, ‘Great is Artemis of Ephesos’.
116 Burkert 1985, 57, 74.
117 See for instance Aesch. Sept. 267–270 and Ag. 594–596.
118 For example, on the paian-cry: Rutherford 2001, 19.
119 In epic poetry: Hom. Il. 6. 301, Od. 4.767.
120 Willi 2007, 45–46; Rutherford 2001, 21; Thesm. 295–311, Vesp. 874, Pax 453, cf. Xen. An. 3.2.9. See discussion in Pulleyn 1997, 182.
121 Rutherford 2001, 21.
122 Theodoropoulou 2012, 446–447.
123 On this function of the paian-cry, see Rutherford 2001, 21; and on the ololuge-cry, see Pulleyn 1997, 178, 183.
124 Chaniotis 2012, 172–173; Chaniotis 2009, 200–201; also Knottnerus 2014, 319.
125 Davies 2011, 67: ‘The intensification of emotion in combination with core values enhances the self as a social being and frequently aligns the devotee with a transcendent other.’
126 Collins 1995 analyses the parallels between Greek ὀλολύζω and Hittite palwai-; Jameson 1988 also regards the ololuge cry to be a means of summoning the gods, as in Erech. fr. 41 (Austin 1968).
127 Rudhardt 1958, 178–180, suggests this hypothesis concerning the ololuge-cry. In Hymn. Hom. Ap. 119, 445–447, goddesses and mortal women greet the god with this cry.
128 Pulleyn 1997.
129 The expression τήνελλα καλλίνικε as a refrain of a ritual song is attested in the Schol. Pind. Ol. 9.1.
130 On this function, see Willi 2007, 46, and Rutherford 1991, 4.
131 On the close relationship between the cry and the song in the case of paianic utterances, see Rutherford 2001, 21–22.
132 Nub. 967, Pind. Pyth. 1.13, 10.39, Ol. 3.8, Bacchyl. Epin. 9.68; Dunbar 1995, 507.
133 Jakov and Voutiras 2005, 123.
134 Pherekrates, Persians fr. 138.5. On the custom of shouting the paian-cry three times: PMG 933; also see Porta 1999, 142–143. Cf. Aesch. Ag. 246 τριτόσπονδον… παιῶνα.
135 Cf. Av. 1504, where Peisetairos acclaims Prometheus in a loud voice and Prometheus asks him not to shout. In tragedies, cf. Soph. Trach. 212, Eur. Med.168, Phoen. 679, 1036, Bacch. 524, Tro. 335.
136 The shout of the gods must serve as a ritual model for humans. The self-reflexive image of gods performing rituals and uttering prayers is an important one in Greek religion. See Patton 2009, 116–117, 177.
137 83, 151, and 992; cf. 977, 1020.
138 Anth. Pal. 9.147 and in Ap. Rhod. Argon. 4.1410, Callim. Hymn. 5.1; Porta 1999, 148–152.
139 = Page, SLG 460–465. See Rutherford 1995.
140 Cf. Eur. Bacch. 87, Pind. Pyth. 8.55, 258, 9.83, Bacchyl. Epin. 3.16, Soph. Ant. 1135, Eur. HF 782, and Av. 1233, Dem. 21. 51, Dem. 43. 66, Lucian Prom. 19.
141 Studied in detail in Dillon 1996.
142 Johnston 2008, 129.
143 A late source informs us that there was a superstition concerning the braying of a donkey, John Chrysostom, In Epist. ad. Eph., Migne 62.92.31. Melampous was said to have written a poem on the art of divination by human bodily twitches Peri Palmon Mantike. On the type of divination by chance utterances called cledonomancy, see Dillon 1996, 101.
144 Farting appears to be an omen in Hymn. Hom. Merc. 293–303; cf. farting compared to a divine sign also in Nub. 291–298.
145 Dover 1993a, 219.
146 Wills 1969, 313, 316.
147 In this respect, oracles overlap not only with divinatory practices but also with hymns and epic tradition.
148 Bonnechere 2007, 147.
149 Smith 1989 concludes that the negative representation of oracles in comedy was due to the political situation of the Peloponnesian war and the unattractive role of soothsayers in the political climate of the time. On the political interpretation of the oracles in comedy, see also Nilsson 1972, 136–140.
150 In Peace, the dactylic hexameters even continue throughout the whole scene (1063–1114).
151 Fontenrose 1978, 174. He classifies recorded Greek oracles into three categories: historical, quasi-historical, and legendary and further concludes that historical oracle texts tended to be simple and direct, while other, legendary or ‘non-genuine’ oracles were more obscure and ambiguous. This difference leads Fontenrose to suggest that the tradition of oracular narrative constituted a special genre of mantic poetry that differed from authentic verse oracles. Maurizio 1997 compellingly challenges Fontenrose’s interpretation, claiming that, being part of an oral tradition, oracular texts undergo a completely different authentication from that which a modern historian applies to his or her sources.
152 See also Desfray 1999.
153 Fontenrose 1978, xxiv.
154 Fontenrose 1978, 176.
155 Cf. Hdt. 8.77 on the oracle of Bakis.
156 Dougherty 1992.
157 Paus. 5.7.3; Euseb. Praep. Evang. 5.31.15; Diod. 8.17.1.
158 Paus. 10.10.6.
159 Euseb. Praep. Evang. 6.7; Diod. 8.32.2; Diod. 8.21.3. Fontenrose 1978, 173, states that it introduces the defining clause in oracles about cities and places.
160 If this is indeed a colonisation oracle, which city or land could be colonised in the context of the myth about Theseus? Theseus was not a prolific coloniser: the only colony he founded was Pythopolis. However, Oinopion who was known to colonise Chios appears to be Theseus’ son in the poem by Ion of Chios, The foundation of Chios. There are some indirect details that corroborate this suggestion. Ion is probably making a political statement by linking an important figure from Chian history to Athens as part of the ideological agenda during the time of the Delian league. One indirect link might connect Theopompos’ Theseus with Chios: fr. 19 features the Athenian orator Isaios, who taught rhetoric on Chios till 403 BCE. Oinopion became popular in fourth-century comedies. Nikostratos and Philetairos wrote plays with the title Oinopion, although both seem to represent Oinopion as Dionysos’ son. For comedy, being a Dionysiac genre, Oinopion was apparently a fitting character. If the oracle in fr. 18 is a foundation oracle, the word kardamon might be a riddle punning on Kardamyle, the name of a Chian city. Calling Chios a Persian land would be in that case an exaggeration of oracular style which put special emphasis on the foreignness of the land of the colonisers’ destination.
161 1992, 44.
162 Plato Sophists fr. 161 χρησμῳδόληρος.
163 Muecke 1998.
164 Flower 2008, 188; Scarpi 1998; Od. 10. 304, 12. 59–72, Il. 2. 813–814, 1.403, 14.291. The human and divine languages differ because gods have more knowledge of the world and therefore more words to describe what lies beyond human knowledge. The divine language indicates the nature of things, Maurizio 1998, 141; see also Watkins 1970 and Bader 1989. The ambiguous language of oracles is an extensive use of metaphor and is never evident (Pythia indicates, σημαίνει, in Herodotos) because of its poetic nature: Maurizio 1998. Oracles serve as a ‘conversion mechanism between the inscrutable divine and the domain of human deliberation’ (Kurke 2009, 438).
165 ‘Apollo seems to get his oracles from Zeus, as he also says in the Iphikles (= fr. 313) and Aischylos in Priestesses (= fr. 86)… and Aristophanes in Heroes.’
166 Parker 2004; the discussion of laymen and experts in the divinatory process in Beerden 2013, 55–58, 65–66.
167 Hdt 7.143.
168 Hdt 7.143.1–3: ‘Now there was a certain Athenian, by name and title Themistocles son of Neocles, who had lately risen to be among their chief men. He claimed that the readers of oracles (χρησμολόγοι) had incorrectly interpreted the whole of the oracle and reasoned that if the verse really pertained to the Athenians, it would have been formulated in less mild language, calling Salamis ‘cruel’ rather than ‘divine’ seeing that its inhabitants were to perish. Correctly understood, the gods’ oracle was spoken not of the Athenians but of their enemies, and his advice was that they should believe their ships to be the wooden wall and so make ready to fight by sea. When Themistocles put forward this interpretation, the Athenians judged him to be a better counsellor than the readers of oracles (τῶν χρησμολόγων), who would have had them prepare for no sea fight, and, in short, offer no resistance at all, but leave Attica and settle in some other country.’ Transl. Godley 1960.
169 Discussed in Maurizio 1997, 328; Hdt. 9.42–43.
170 Otherwise the consequences can be disastrous as Herodotos shows passim, see especially the story of Kroisos.
171 This makes oracles resemble other types of ritualised speech, such as prayers, which also required some kind of expression of consent. On the acceptance or rejection of oracles in Greece, see Maurizio 1997, 314–315. The formula in comedy (and in Herodotos) for accepting the oracle as an authentic one is the verb δέχομαι, the same verb used in ritual speech to confirm a prayer in an amen-like utterance: Plut. 63; Kurke 2009, 429.
172 Dillery 2005, 213–214, 217, discusses the flourishing industry of oracle-mongers, khresmologoi, involved in the representation of oracles or their interpretation at that time, which was probably caused by plague (Thuc. 2.54.2, 6.27.3), the mutilation of herms, and the Sicilian expedition (Thuc. 8.1.1, 7.50.4).
173 Nevertheless, in two comic fragments, the term mantis appears in the context implying that the soothsayer is ‘true’: Nikochar. fr. 1 see above and Kratin. fr. 505 = (Dem. 29). Also Av. 724, 594; Plut. 11.
174 Parker 2000, 80.
175 Barker 2006, 15.
176 Ruffell 2011, 68–69.
177 Muecke 1998, 259
178 Muecke 1998, 270; cf. Eq. 233.
179 Bowden 2003, 271–272.
180 Cingano 2009, 121–123.
181 The prophet Zarathushtra of the Iranian tradition exchanges questions and answers with Ahura Mazda. The alteration of questions and answers is a model present also in the Poetic Edda and Rigveda. The recurrent type of question in Avestan hymns has a recognisable folklore structure of a question or riddle with a superlative embedded in it: who is the best/most…?, which is present both in the Contest of Homer and Hesiod and in the Hesiodic Melampodeia. The obscure language of riddles that finds its place in the oral tradition requires the special skill of an Indo-European poet to understand metaphor. As West 2007, 364–365, writes: ‘… the Indo-European poet was master of a special language and style that often obscured the plain identity of things under periphrases and symbols, a language that was in fact sometimes ’riddling’, presenting to hearers unfamiliar with the code a challenge to comprehension. It is not surprising that we find stories of poets measuring themselves against one another in contests both of riddling language and of mythological learning.’
182 Muellner 1976, 132: ‘Prayer and ritual are decidedly agonistic in Indic and Iranian, a characteristic which can be paralleled for institutions based on reciprocity in other archaic cultures, and which should probably not be considered a recent, isolated, or ‘secularizing’ tendency in these’; and further, 133–134.
183 Cf. late antique hagiographical narrative of the actor Genesius, who imitated the rite of baptism on order to mock the Christians and suddenly experienced the power of the ritual speech act finding himself converted into the Christian faith; see Panayotakis 1997.